|
Top Document: comp.cad.autocad AutoLISP FAQ (part 1/2) - general Previous Document: News Headers Next Document: [1] Where can I find AutoLISP routines on the Internet? See reader questions & answers on this topic! - Help others by sharing your knowledge AutoLISP will be definitely supported in future releases. VB was introduced to simplify Office Automation: ACAD <-> Excel/Access Both languages have advantages and disadvantages. You should take a look at both. VB seems to be more graphical and AutoLISP more logical. The object concept of VBA seems to be easier to learn, but you cannot run commands like in AutoLISP. The new VBA (>= R14.01) is extremely fast. See also [5.2] The future of AutoLISP already is Visual Lisp. For VLISP see [5.3] URL's: http://www.autodesk.com/vlisp, http://www.autodesk.com/develop/devres/visual/faq.htm, also [0.1] below. [0.1] What changed with AutoCAD 2000? The name :) No, there's much more, but you may call it Release 2000, R15 (though 15 is the version number and not the release number), A2000 or abbrevated A2K. The new Visual Lisp kernel (formerly "Vital Lisp") replaced the old xlisp-based AutoLISP kernel. What problems should you expect with Visual Lisp in R2000? (only the bad news). At http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/autocad/docs/r2000-news.txt I compiled a white paper. The major points are: Stricter error checking on loading, ACAD.LSP vs ACADDOC.LSP, You cannot/need not compile to ARX anymore, Incompatibilities AutoLISP - Visual LISP: Lisp functions are atoms no lists anymore, Protected symbols, Better exception handling, Pathname of the loaded VLX?, vl-export-symbol -> vl-doc-set, long acad symbol table names: EXTNAMES ActiveX automation, Variants and SAFEARRAYs, FAS4 cannot be loaded on R14. [0.2] Why cannot I create ARX anymore? With AutoCAD 2000 you cannot do that anymore as with ViLL or VLISP 4. Instead you compile to VLX (Visual Lisp Extension), which has basically the same functionality as the old Visual Lisp/Vital Lisp ARX, with the following differences: * You'll have to (load) the app. Before you had to (arxload) it. - Pro: Initialization is easier. The VLX doesn't abort completely on any error while loading. Before the whole ARX crashed with mysterious errors. - Pro: VLX are much smaller because they don't carry the whole Lisp environment, the VLRTS, along. Instead there's only one environment, VL.ARX, distributed with acad itself. So you can ship much smaller applications. - Contra: With loaded VLX there's no easy way to get the pathname of the app. Before it was possible with (arx) or (vl-exe-filename) * VLX has the option of seperate or common namespaces. With seperate ARX you had only the option of seperate namespaces (in fact completely seperate lisp environments). - Pro: This means that you can now choose the fastest and most secure compilation mode (LINK, DROP) and still keep common namespaces. (most of my apps benefit from this. I seperated my apps into one main module and several smaller ones) - Pro: ARX is only compatible per release, thus completely incompatible! VLX is new and therefore compatible only to newer releases (R16,...) but as lisp application it is by far more compatible than a ARX app. * Loaded ARX apps with (arx) return the pathname, loaded VLX apps with (vl-list-loaded-vlx) only a symbol, no path. This is a design flaw. You don't need ARX modules anymore. This is a feature, no bug. User Contributions:Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic:Top Document: comp.cad.autocad AutoLISP FAQ (part 1/2) - general Previous Document: News Headers Next Document: [1] Where can I find AutoLISP routines on the Internet? Part1 - Part2 - Single Page [ Usenet FAQs | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index ] Send corrections/additions to the FAQ Maintainer: rurban@xarch.tu-graz.ac.at (Reini Urban)
Last Update March 27 2014 @ 02:11 PM
|
comp.cad.autocad AutoLISP FAQ (part 1/2) - general
Section - [0] The Future of AutoLISP? Should I learn it or VB instead?
Search the FAQ Archives
N - O - P - Q - R - S - T - U - V - W - X - Y - Z
comp.cad.autocad AutoLISP FAQ (part 1/2) - general
Section - [0] The Future of AutoLISP? Should I learn it or VB instead?
( Part1 - Part2 - Single Page
)
[ Usenet FAQs | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index | Property taxes ]
Throughout time, we can see how we have been carefully conditioned to come to this point where we are on the verge of a cashless society. Did you know that the Bible foretold of this event almost 2,000 years ago?
In the book of Revelation 13:16-18, we read,
"He (the false prophet who deceives many by his miracles--Revelation 19:20) causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666."
Referring to the last generation, this could only be speaking of a cashless society. Why so? Revelation 13:17 states that we cannot buy or sell unless we receive the mark of the beast. If physical money was still in use, we could buy or sell with one another without receiving the mark. This would contradict scripture that states we need the mark to buy or sell!
These verses could not be referring to something purely spiritual as scripture references two physical locations (our right hand or forehead) stating the mark will be on one "OR" the other. If this mark was purely spiritual, it would indicate both places, or one--not one OR the other!
This is where it comes together. It is amazing how accurate the Bible is concerning the implantable RFID microchip. Here is information from a man named Carl Sanders who worked with a team of engineers to help develop this RFID chip:
"Carl Sanders sat in seventeen New World Order meetings with heads-of-state officials such as Henry Kissinger and Bob Gates of the C.I.A. to discuss plans on how to bring about this one-world system. The government commissioned Carl Sanders to design a microchip for identifying and controlling the peoples of the world—a microchip that could be inserted under the skin with a hypodermic needle (a quick, convenient method that would be gradually accepted by society).
Carl Sanders, with a team of engineers behind him, with U.S. grant monies supplied by tax dollars, took on this project and designed a microchip that is powered by a lithium battery, rechargeable through the temperature changes in our skin. Without the knowledge of the Bible (Brother Sanders was not a Christian at the time), these engineers spent one-and-a-half-million dollars doing research on the best and most convenient place to have the microchip inserted.
Guess what? These researchers found that the forehead and the back of the hand (the two places the Bible says the mark will go) are not just the most convenient places, but are also the only viable places for rapid, consistent temperature changes in the skin to recharge the lithium battery. The microchip is approximately seven millimeters in length, .75 millimeters in diameter, about the size of a grain of rice. It is capable of storing pages upon pages of information about you. All your general history, work history, criminal record, health history, and financial data can be stored on this chip.
Brother Sanders believes that this microchip, which he regretfully helped design, is the “mark” spoken about in Revelation 13:16–18. The original Greek word for “mark” is “charagma,” which means a “scratch or etching.” It is also interesting to note that the number 666 is actually a word in the original Greek. The word is “chi xi stigma,” with the last part, “stigma,” also meaning “to stick or prick.” Carl believes this is referring to a hypodermic needle when they poke into the skin to inject the microchip."
Mr. Sanders asked a doctor what would happen if the lithium contained within the RFID microchip leaked into the body. The doctor replied by saying a terrible sore would appea (...)